LOSS ON BUSES

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21471, 20 April 1933, Page 12

LOSS ON BUSES

NEW CONTROL SUGGESTED OFFER TO PRIVATE OWNERS TRANSPORT BOARD'S POLICY The annual loss of £IB,OOO incurred in connection with the running of the feeder bus services was discussed by the Auckland Transport Board yesterday. A suggestion that they should be withdrawn and licences granted to the present drivers and others to run their own services was rejected, and it was laid down as a matter of policy that the only condition on which the buses will be relinquished is that private operators or a combination of operators shall agree to take over the services en bloc.

It was stated in a report by the manager, Mr. A. E. Ford, that the buses at present cost £26,546 to run (£17,930 representing operating expenses and £8616 capital charges). Receipts amount to £84.18, so that the annual loss is £18,128. He pointed out, howover, that even should the bus services be dispensed with, capital charges amounting to £5922 would still have to bo met. On March 31 an amount of £'2582 on account of depreciation ceased, the capital cost of all the buses having then been fully written oil'. The excess of working expenses over revenue amounted to £9512 a year. Expense of Services The manager said bus fares were at a low rate. The recent increase in the price of petrol and tax on power kerosene would increase the annual cost by about £1276. yet there had been no corresponding increase in fares. The approximate value of fares carried to and from the trams by all feeder buses was £5866, but the buses received no credit lor that in the accounts. Should the feeder service lares be substantially increased or the service rendered less eflicient, that amount would bo adversely affected. The bus services were certainly expensive to operate, said Mr. Ford, but it was doubtful if a private opera tor would agree to carry on the Blockhouse Bay, Rose bank Road, Waterview or Waikowhai services at anything approaching the present fares without in some way being assisted by the board. It was also extremely doubtful if a private operator could run the i'oint Resolution and Shore .Road services without raising the fares or securing passengers from parallel tram services. "So long as all the bus services at present operated by the board are taken up by private enterprise at not materially higher fares, 1 would recommend the relinquishing of these services," he added. "1 wish to make it clear, however, that if some only of the services are run by private enterprise, tho board being left with tho more unprofitable ones, the board's position would consequently be unsatisfactory, as the garage would have to be kept open and maintenance costs on a higher scale a bus mile would still have to bo met." Duty to Residents Mr. E. H. Potter said the bus losses should bo eliminated as soon as possible. He believed private enterprise should be encouraged to operate services not only in the board's area, but further afield, particularly south of Auckland, where tremendous development was bound to take place. Mr. G. Grey Campbell said the board was under an obligation, in accordance with its franchise, to servo districts which at present were not payable from a transport point of view. If tho buses were withdrawn trams would have to replace them, and the losses would be greater still. Tho chairman, Mr. J. A. C. Allum, said the question was whether tho board should leave the residents stranded, so that they lost not only a transport service, but the equity in properties'they had purchased. Tho board was operating the buses solely from a sense of duty. It was willing to part with them if a privatf operator or a combination of operators offered to take over all the services and operate them at existing fares, but it would not allow anyone to "pick the best and leave the worst to us."

It was decided to endorse the principle outlined by- the chairman.